Share this:

Like this:

21 Responses to Misconduct of Solicitors

I have experienced problems with the Official Solicitor. 10 years ago they were asked to take on a case against my parents for child abuse which has crippled me mentally. Having never looked at anything in relation to the claim against my parents they declined “because of lack of evidence.” When I took the papers and the evidence to their offices to ask them to look at the evidence they refused. Several years later a psychiatrist asked them to take on the running of the case. This time they did not even reply. A legal adviser informed me that they did not want to take on the case because of costs. Then the perpetrators of the child abuse (my parents) died and the official solicitor at this point decided to take on the runnning of this case. Apparently because they could be paid significant costs. My parents’ estate was £1.400.000. It was devided between my brother and myself. I have been awarded after probate £200.000. Where has the money gone?

Dia dhuit! Little doubt ongoing cover-up re District Courts-Martial 11/02/1985. The Royal British Legion recognise “anomalies” – need to pursue redress of grievances, “a stitch up”. And then issues/matters surrounding abuse of my children and cover up York council and others. I will battle on as necessary within confines of the LAW in spirit of the LAW as intended. Had others listened to me, had others listened to my son DECLAN G.M. CURRAN… “…… son found hanged” 6TH JUNE 1995..
Abusers… mill-stones round necks, cast into sea(of quick-lime) a.s.p.:a.t.e.

I employed solicitors twenty years ago against the South Wales Police and soon sacked following their unprofessiional conduct. My next commited suicide leaving ten years of search for independant legal advice.

I recently employed a solicitor who has now disappeared off the map!

The barrister cannot find him and for a week none of my calls get through or e-mails acknowledged .

http://www.kirkflyingvet.com blogs and downloads indicate the seriousness and magnitude which I will also comment upon on Dialect Radio, Bristol 2pm Fridays 93.2 FM

The law society….
Lets take a look at what they are….
A monopolist is defined as a single supplier that constitutes the whole industry. The legal definition of monopoly is a firm which has a market share greater than 25%. Monopolists tend to have the … the right or have been given ” legal monopoly by goverment to be the only one company to carry out the supply…of a particular product or service.

Is the law society a “Limited company”? well they are registered as a limited company.
The Goverment rebuffs victims time and time again, yet it is Goverment that is at the head of the realm of the law society which is and does operate as a “monopoly”. that being the case the Goverment has the power to take away
that legal power if a company abuses its position and power.

Mr Vince Cable must in his role as the Bisuness & Industry Secretrary investigate if the law society has and does use its powers for the advancement and benefit in its “own interests” the monoply rules do not allow for this, nor does it allow a company to “overeach its powers” when those powers are and, in particular used to put at or disadvantage the Public in favour of its own company interests, employees and or members.

Here we have the law society registered as a Limited Company, yet it has the monoply over the legal industry, a Limited Company that spans internationaly, can Mr Cable explain how on earth a company that is so large, powerful, and being “internationaly exspansive” can possibly be perceived as a “limited Company” ?

Is it not time to break up this monoply, to bring about healthy competion, fairness, and choice for both the public and the legal industry, giving rise to a more affordable service?.

If a Limited Company is allowed such unchallanged power, then victims of legal services will continue to be let down and more importantly “unprotected”
When a company fails to appropriatly use its own regulation to protect consumers of “legal services” then on that one basis alone merits an investigation by the Bisuness & Industry secretrary.

When this all powerful company can rule that a member of the public who has paid for a service, in that, the consumer has had a “adeqiaute Service” in order to protect its member, when that member did not even provide a “contract of Service” to that consumer required by “Law”, which according to the SRA/Fraud unit failure to provide a contract of service is in fact a “Crime” when that member then goes on to perpetrate numerous acts of fraud, and pervert the course of justice, how can that possibly be an adeqaute service Mr Cable? and please note the law society is, in this statement confirming the word “service”

So were does that leave the consumer of this paid for legal service, and were does that leave the law society member? is this not only an over reaching of this “limited Company’s” power but also an abuse of its powers?

Are we the public to continue t be forced to live with the damage and injustice that this “Limited Company” has power the to address in the interest of public protection, but instead uses its powers to dissempower the public, by re-appropriating consumer protection to protect its members.

Lets bring this company in line with the consumer protection act, and in order to do that the “monopoly” that is law society MUST in “the public interest” be broken up.
We the public demand consumer protection, we the public need consumer protection, and radical reform of the legal industry.

We have problem with solicitor, my wife CRPS (Complex Regional Pain Syndromes)disease and PTSS(Post -traumatic stress disorder. Her pain and depression is worsening and spreading in other parts of her body,this neglect fueling her problems.My wife solicitor has ignored her problems and her few medical experts are writing her witness statement without her clinical records since 6 years,Solicitor is refusing to obtain those NHS reports for witness statement. When we indicate solicitor’s faults then my wife union has stop her funding.Wife solicitor and her union solicitors are forcing her for negotiation. Her life at risk due to pain and depression but she left helpless and vulnerable by her helping hands.They are not happy to produce her clinical records for medical experts as well as for Court purposes. They are asking for to do negotiation in little money,which does not even cover her past loss and nothing about future. But her problems are well documented in NHS hospitals and GP records and she is still in treatment. I have also no idea what to do,I had no litigation experiences in my life.Please give me suggestion.It is real problem and we are sufferer,Please help us

THE FIRST-TIER TRIBUNAL AND UPPER TRIBUNAL HAS BEEN CREATED BY STATUTE: THIS IS NOW UNDER THE TRIBUNALS COURTS AND ENFORCEMENT ACT 2007
A STATUTORY INSTRUMENT NO 2010 NO 20 HAD BEEN ISSUED WHICH CAME INTO FORCE ON THE 20TH JANUARY 201O

THERE IS A RIGHT TO APPEAL AGAINST THE DECISIONS MADE BY THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

SECTION 58 OF THE DATA PROTECTION ACT 1998 IS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN DOCUMENT WHICH ANY PERSON CAN UNDERSTAND IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE AS THERE IS THE OXFORD DICTIONARY.

SECTION 1 OF THE ZAMBIA INDEPENDENCE ACT 1964 IS A PARLIAMENT ACT WHICH IS IN THE PUBLIC DOMAIN DOCUMENT WHERE THE INFORMATION IS NOT EXEMPT INFORMATION WHICH IS MORE THAN 30 YEARS.

THE INTERPRETATION ACT 1978, THE JUDGES AND COURT OFFICERS ARE REQUIRED TO TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF THE PARLIAMENT ACTS.

THE CPR 35-3 EXPERTS OVERRIDING DUTY TO THE COURT?

THE CPR 1-3 DUTY OF THE PARTIES TO ASSIST THE COURT.

SCHEDULE 10 OF THE CRIME AND COURTS ACT 2013
IN THE MATRIMONIAL FAMILY PROCEEDINGS ACT 1984 AFTER SECTION 31A (Which is inserted by Section 17 of this Act) insert-

31C JUDGES-

(1) A person is a judge of the Family Court if the person-

(a) is the Lord Chief Justice

(c) is the president of the Queens Bench Division

(e) Is the Chancellor of the High Court

(h) Is the Puisne Judge of the High Court

(j) is a Circuit Judge.

(q) is a judge of the Upper Tribunal by virtue of appointment under paragraph 1 (1) of Schedule 3 to the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007

(x) is a District Judge (Magistrates Court), or

(y) is a Justice of the peace who is not a District Judge (Magistrates Courts)

but see also section 9 of the Senior Courts Act 1981 (Certain Ex-Judges may act as Judges of the Family Court).

They have failed to take into consideration of the Family Law Act 1986 Part 3 Declaration of Marital Status Section 55 (1) (d), 58, 59 (1) (2), 60 and Repeals made under that Act.

It is not me who has been wasting the Time of the Courts and Expenses on the Tax Payers, as there has been Deliberate Concealment, Mistake or Omission for a considerable number of years.

Nelson Mandella who spent more than 27 Years in Prison, as the United Kingdom Government and the United States of America wanted to control the economy of many countries in Africa.

The First Zambian President Dr Kenneth David Kaunda of Zambia, He had also spent a year in Gwelo Prison for the Struggle of Independence from the United Kingdom.

Other British Judges are colonial and Imperialist minded person, as the Senior Courts Act 1981 does.’t apply to any Country outside the United Kingdom. When any Person who is living outside the United Kingdom, than he/She has to comply with the Constitution of that Country.

Other Solicitors and Other Barristers they do mislead the Court, whilst they do benefit from the proceeds of unlawful conduct.
When a Litigant in Person does make this charges, than He/She is labelled as a Vexatious Litigant.

The Meaning of the words:- If on an Application by the Attorney General for an Order under Section 42 of the Senior Courts Act 1981-

It does not state that if any Person who applies for a Civil Restraint Order-
As Section 2 (6) to (8) of the Civil Procedure Act 1997 which was in force on the 9th July 2003 in Bhamjee versus David Forsdick, Rueben Taylor, David Elvin QC, Robert Walton and the Treasury Solicitors
and
Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee versus The First Secretary of STATE (John Prescot at the time)

Pleading for justice.
Injustice involving a horrific accident.
If anybody is wondering why I am turning to the police, and claiming this case is fraudulent.
The 1st solicitor we had, never knew the meaning of CPR rules, took 3 to 4 months to answer our letters, never saw the plaintiff till 8 months after the accident. The Law Society said that they could no longer be involved, the next step for us to take is to sue the solicitor for professional negligence, could you imagine a person that badly injured have to start a 2nd case suing her solicitor for professional negligence. To obtain is bundled of files the firm wanted 15,000 but we had to pay £5000 +VAT.
My opinion of the 1st solicitor, a child that has been given a sweet shop for Christmas.
Our 2nd solicitor, failed to turn up at the hearing, had the case dismissed.
I went to the health and safety officer for Waltham Forest to obtain their report, our solicitor phoned me after hours to say that I could not have the report because Costco’s had accepted liability, this is our 1st solicitor the only job that he had done that took such speed, after visiting the health and safety Department that evening.
So you see within the 1st month I manage to have the firm except liability, only for the 2nd solicitor to have the case thrown out of court.
I had to approach the Law Society to have the firm obtain a barrister to get the case reinstated because liability had already been obtain.
A huge Law firm opposite London Bridge Station, called Anthony Gold would only take the case on if we sue the previous Solicitor for professional negligence and get our compensation that way, of course we refuse.
After several attempts to get another Solicitor we finally got our final one, with time totally run out.
My opinion on the 2nd solicitor, the case was conducted by his superiors who ran the firm, the firm was totally lacking in empathy, the solicitor only had 2 years experience and he was dealing with a brain injury case. Rootless, prepared to take the fall on behalf of Costco’s. The 3rd firm, I thought I had finally found a fully experience Solicitor with experience of brain injury, she heard our case I presented her all the documents I had filed so far. She also obtains the bundle from the 2nd Solicitor. I cannot remember of hand how much it was but considerably less. I realize this is our last chance, the time has run out.
Happy to know that I had obtained a solicitor that understood brain injury, I could finally relax. She call me later and said she was extremely busy her partner would run the case while she was way, but finally it was apparent that she had given the case to another partner that specialize in mesothelioma asbestos disease, well I find myself totally trapped I cannot get another solicitor because my time is up, that means my 3 years it is over. I have to accept the consequences.
The 3rd solicitor knew that I keep all copies provided by the firm, letters and e-mails, so this Solicitor hardly sent us any letters or e-mail, he made us go to his office whenever he needed to discuss anything.
What the previous solicitors fail to do, He never obtain the required rehabilitation my wife required his expert witness promised to help my wife and said he could definitely help her, but he never followed it through.
He never knew the meaning of fiduciary duties, never followed my instructions. He decided to call in an official Solicitor to take over our place and ended the case.
Not exactly the type of plumber you would like in your home. Recommended job, dictator.
My opinion on this Solicitor, extremely heartless, only suitable to work for the SS, would be handy if Hitler was still around, extremely devious.

Helen Mulcahy of Hill Hofstetter caused millions of pounds of losses to NCFC because of her defective advice and misleading statements. at the same time she acted as solicitor and self style publicist for the fraudster Russell King who was behind the purchase of the Club. NCFC has stated that it intends to bring claims to recover these monies.

we have recently suffered a bereavement, my father dying suddenly, leaving my profoundly deaf mother alone after 60 years of marriage.
Both my mother and father had learning difficulties and in 2011 they informed me they had made wills with woolcombe and yonge solicitor in Plymouth with my sister made executor.
Upon his death we contacted the solicitor to be told your sister is not the executor, we are.
we found that a power of attorney had been sold to them in my sisters name and due to their learning difficulties they were confused thinking this was the same thing.
Woolcombe and yonge are taking a huge percentage of the entire estate including the family home which is in joint names with mum, she is devastated and the misery inflicted by this solicitor (Gemma) makes us feel that she has spat on my fathers dead body.
When my sister complained that they had been miss sold as they did not understand what they were buying, no hearing loop for mum, no audio will for dad who was registered blind and their combined learing difficulties, she was told I don’t know why you are angry you are not the beneficiary – we were outraged, we are angry for our parents, dad worked hard all his life and wanted mum to be looked after, and as far as we are concerned they have been stolen from.

Application for Permission of the High Court Judge under Section 42 (3) of the SCA 1981 and For a Stay of Execution by Virtue of Section 70 of the Tribunals Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 and other Relief for an Injunction Order. Claim Number CO_4353_2014 issued on the 18th September 2014 High Court of Justice Administrative.

Ismail Abdulhai Bhamjee

And

(1) The London Borough of Waltham Forest Council & Their Agents

(2) Newlyn PLC (Enforcement Agents) & Their Agents

(3) The London Borough of Newham Council & Their Agents

(4) The London Borough of Redbridge Council & Their Agents.

The Civil Procedure Rules Part 5 does allow non-parties to obtain copies of the Court Documents upon the payment of Court Fees-

The Criminal Procedure Rules 52.8

(3) These goods must not be taken under the warrant:

(a) Cloths or beddings used by the defendant or by any one living with the defendant

(b) Tools, books, vehicles, or other equipment that the defendant needs to use in the defendant’s employment, business or vocation, unless the defendant is a corporation.

Motorists whose motor Vehicles have been clamped or removed by the Enforcement Agents, should consider the above.
As the Road Traffic Penalty Notice is not a Licence for making money by the Borough Councils as Cash Cow

The Criminal Justice and Data Protection (Protocol No 36) Regulations 2014.
Statutory Instrument 2014 No 3141
The Secretary of State being a Minister designated for the purpose of Section 2 (2) of the European Communities Act 1972 in relation to criminal Justice and data Protection, in exercise of the powers conferred by that section, makes the following Regulations.
A Draft of the Regulations has been laid before and approved by resolution of each House of Parliament in accordance with Section 2 (2) and paragraph 2 (2) of Schedule 2 to, that Act.

You should read the Statutory Instrument-

I also request that Section 2 (1) and 3 (1) of the European Communities Act 1972 should be taken into consideration.

The Information Commissioner has a Statutory Duty also under this Statutory Instrument, but has previously failed to take appropriate action against the Bar Standards Board and The Independent Police Commmission.